“The dairy industry likes to tell us that these trans fats are ‘natural’ and therefore not a problem. But the facts of the matter are that at least 10 of the trans fats in butter are the same as those found in partially hydrogenated oils. Not surprisingly, dairy trans fats have similar adverse effects on blood lipids to those in partially hydrogenated oils”

You haven’t answered my point about your beloved CLA being eaten along with harmful saturated fat in all its natural sources (dairy or not). You haven’t demonstrated that CLA is not harmful, and certainly not when eaten with saturated fat. You mock me for proving to you that mouse models are not regarded as universally useful, and ignore what I’ve linked where it’s stated very clearly that mice study results on CLA have not been replicated in humans. And you cite one paper which is so heavily invested in promoting CLA that it uses outdated research to mislead readers into thinking HRT/oestrogen are contra-indicated for post-menopausal women.

This is dangerous crap you’re pushing. It’s up there with antivaxxers in the degree of harm people who believe this rubbish can do to themselves and anyone they feed.

My god, you claim to be a teacher and you come out with this level of insult and invective? You haven’t dealt with a single substantive point I’ve raised – because you’re incapable. Instead you mislead, misquote, and deflect, then turn to insults when all else fails.

Typical paleo promoter.

Somehow I doubt you can teach me much about research.

I’m not the one spraying exclamation points everywhere, or calling people idiotic. And I did warn you I would pick at your claims.

“I did not say, nor do I think, that trans fats are wonderful! I have conscientiously avoided them for years!”

And yet you have to pop up in a post where Bill is reporting the FDA’s decision, to point out “they are not all equally harmful and some of them may have some benefits (especially CLA)” without stopping to think that people’s ingestion of trans fats do not happen in isolation, and while they are scarfing this wonderful CLA through animal, palm and coconut fat, they are also getting a load of other trans fats and saturated fats.

“One of Bill’s original points appeared to be the need to be cautious about butter! And one of your original points appeared to be that you had been allowing your husband to eat too much cheese.”

Yes, because of the blatant lies being promoted in the media by the dairy/paleo interests. Like this guy does:

http://chriskresser.com/can-some-trans-fats-be-healthy/

“Does this mean we should avoid all grass-fed animal products, cut out red meat, and only eat fat-free dairy if we want to reduce our risk of heart disease? Not at all! These naturally occurring trans fats in ruminant animal products are not at all harmful to our health, and may actually reduce the development of many different chronic diseases.”

Note, apart from the weasel words “may actually reduce the development of many different chronic diseases” , how the issue of saturated fats is just handwaved away, because paleo supporters don’t believe saturated fats are harmful.

They fooled me. You should be so proud.

“My point is that the trans fats in dairy may not be as harmful as some other trans fats.”

And your point is wrong, so far as heart health is concerned, which is what the FDA is primarily concerned about:

“Effect of Animal and Industrial Trans Fatty Acids on HDL and LDL Cholesterol Levels in Humans – A Quantitative Review”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2830458/

Concluded:
“Published data suggest that all fatty acids with a double bond in the trans configuration raise the ratio of plasma LDL to HDL cholesterol.”

“Your assertion that the CLA studies are being funded by ‘paleo nutjobs’ is bizarre and ridiculous and unfounded.”

Really? Why are there 356,000 results articles by paleo promoters all praising CLA when I search for ‘cla paleo’? All claiming health benefits which have not been proven?

I could have also mentioned the booming growth in CLA supplement products, all being promoted without any actual evidence of real biological benefit or any effect on cancer.

Who’s funding this research? Even in your own link, “Dr. Yeonhwa Park is one of the inventors of CLA use patents that are assigned to the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation”. There’s money to be made from it.

“Consider the conclusion from this study: Conjugated Linoleic Acid and Postmenopausal Women’s Health”

As CLA was first identified as an anticarcinogenic component in beef in 1987 (Ha and others 1987), it has shown a wide range of biologically beneficial activities in human health. Current preclinical and clinical studies suggest the potential protective effects of CLA against postmenopausal bone loss and metabolic dysfunctions. CLA seems to display the estrogen antagonistic activities through the inhibition of ERα-mediated signaling in ER-positive cancer cells, however it is currently unknown whether the effects of CLA on ER signaling is tissue-specific. Based on current reports, CLA supplementation may have potential benefits to prevent or offset menopausal symptoms, however, further studies are still needed to determine the efficacy as well as the safety of CLA use in postmenopausal women and the action mechanism regarding estrogen metabolism.

I’ve bolded all the bet-hedging and weasel words in this. Also “it has shown a wide range of biologically beneficial activities in human health” is not actually supported either in the text or through other studies. The most you can say is that it’s probably not harmful in isolation.

That study also says “Based on a large clinical trial of the Women’s Health Initiative in 2002, it was concluded that overall health risks associated with estrogen replacement therapy exceeded benefits in postmenopausal women (Rossouw and others 2002).”

That study is now out of date.

https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2009/190/6/benefits-oestrogen-following-menopause-why-hormone-replacement-therapy-should-be

“AND then stop being so idiotic!”

Yes, Jenny. Trying to hold you to actual facts is definitely idiocy. I’m not going to stop though.

http://www.pnas.org/content/110/9/3507.abstract

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/mar/20/mice-clinical-trials-human-disease (this article has a number of links to scientific studies)

Metabolic syndrome is one area where finding a mice model is particularly tricky

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2869491/

You didn’t even provide a link to the paper you were citing – I had to find that on my own (or perhaps you hoped I wouldn’t).

“Of course rats are different to humans! But that does not mean rat studies have no relevance.”

If you are talking about an area where findings in rodents cannot be replicated in humans (or pigs), then they’re not relevant. When they find those results consistently in humans, then talk about how wonderful trans fats are.

“Whether you like it or not rats and mice are used widely by nutrition scientists”

No, really? Did you learn that in your science degree? Did you learn also that non-human species are imperfect models for humans all too often? (and that’s before you get into sex differences in humans.)

“The multitude of CLA studies demonstrates that not all trans fats are being regarded as equally problematic.”

No, they do not. All they indicate is that (a) there is a lot of money being poured into this research by a group of vested interests and (b) research is being carried out. Nothing has demonstrated that CLA is (a) beneficial in humans or (b) beneficial enough to counteract the ill effects of trans fat consumption.

All your comment proves is that you are still shilling for the paleo nutjobs and their crazy ideas about saturated fat and coconut oil. Their assessment of trans and saturated fats do not have a basis in scientific reality, and what you are saying is both false and dangerous. The only slight consolation is that the paleo believers are all likely to die early from heart disease and once that starts happening, then maybe the rest will see the error of their ways.

Once again, your link does not say what you think it does.

Rats != humans. There is no current research demonstrating consistent benefit in humans.

“it is useful to see that they are not all equally bad!”

You have presented no evidence whatsoever for this statement, and I can find none, either despite the best effort of the vested interests of the dairy, palm oil and coconut shill industries. There is no evidence at all that any trans fat has a non-detrimental effect on cardiac heart disease or vascular health.

“No I don’t have Tourette’s!”

Amazing. One disease you aren’t claiming as your own.

I think this is generally on target. Perhaps it is a bit unfair to lump all the US industries together….some were responsible and eliminated trans fats, but part of the industry have obstructed every effort to reduce intake, including the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which is the industry organization. This has resulted in tens of thousands of premature deaths….they have blood on their hands. Even now, with the FDA action, they are trying every possible delaying tactic.

As for dairy fat, the FDA action specifically refers to partially hydrogenated vegetable fats, so this does not include dairy. I’m not making an effort to take on the trans fat in dairy fat because I think it is better to consider dairy fat as a package, and it is clearly not an optimal fat, but not something we would ban. We have just had a paper accepted looking specifically at dairy fat compared to other sources of calories as they predict risk of CHD…as expected, it is clearly worse than nonhydrogenated vegetable oils and whole grains, and similar to refined carbohydrates.

Walter

In rodents.

In humans (and pigs), apart from some very *very* small trials, eg

http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/15126715

no consistent beneficial effect has been shown.

http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v28/n8/abs/0802641a.html

I’m sure, as you claim to be a scientist, you will recognise that what affects mice, doesn’t necessarily or even often work the same way in humans.